We tried out the campaign variant "The Odyssey" with 3 players the other night and a couple of questions came up:

1) Can the heroes from game 1 which are added to the players' starting decks for game 2 still be leveled up in that 2nd game? We assumed that they couldn't be, as there are always 4 completely different hero stacks present in the 2nd game (so they're quite unique fellows, actually!), but you never know...

2) We had a strange situation at the end of the campaign and couldn't really figure out who the overall winner was... This is what happened:

- Player A won the first game, B came in second, C was last, so the score prior to game 1 was: A=3, B=1, C=0. According to the campaign rules, player A (even though he was not in possession of it, as player B had collected it, ending the game) added the Thunderstone of the 1st game plus one hero of his choice to his starting deck, while B and C both added 2 heroes from their previous decks.

2a) What would have happened in case of a tie in the 1st game? The scoring is clear (3/3/0 or 3/3/3, depending on whether only the 1st two players or all 3 players tie), but how would this affect the setup for game 2? Do all players get to add 2 heroes to their decks now and NOONE gets the Thunderstone? Or do you decide it randomly??

- The second game was won by player C, player B came in second (again) and player A was last (A=0, B=1, C=3), so the totals were now: A=3, B=2, C=3. Okay, the campaign rules for tied scores now say: "...the winner is the player holding a Thunderstone. If all tied players hold a Thunderstone, the player with the Thunderstone worth the most VP wins". So far so good. The funny thing about our game was: Although player C had won game 2, he had not collected the Thunderstone either (The game ended with the Thunderstone reaching rank 1, but without defeating the monster previously lying in that position)! So basically, player A should have been our winner, as he had been given the Thunderstone of the 1st game and it was of course still in his deck. But... Isn't that a little unfair? Or at least: Does this not mean a complete imbalance between game 1 and game 2???

2b) Shouldn't the winner of the 2nd game be awarded the 2nd Thunderstone anyway, regardless of whether he actually got hold of it or not? It seems kind of unfair that the winner of game 1 always gets a Thunderstone, while the winner of game 2 does not necessarily. Therefore, a loser in game 1 only has the tiny chance of being the overall winner, if he scores the most VP AND gets hold of the Thunderstone in game 2 (which the winner of game 1 can almost always easily prevent... ). Mhmmm... this doesn't seem to be well thought through...

Maybe the real question here is: should the winner of the 1st game really always get the thunderstone? Or only in those cases, where he's actually gotten hold of it???

I hope the above is not TOO confusing: here's another try at a shorter version of the story: